PDA

View Full Version : Inevitable P.Rogers article comparing us to 05 Red Sox


caulfield12
09-05-2006, 04:17 AM
http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/columnists/cs-060904rogers,1,4693547.column?coll=cs-columnists

infohawk
09-05-2006, 01:46 PM
Well, he's right. I have been thinking about the parallel for a little while now. The ONLY problem with winning the World Series is that the bar is then so high that there is nowhere else to go but down. Win or bust. That said, it's a nice problem to have!!!

PaulDrake
09-05-2006, 01:58 PM
Some old timers say this team reminds them of the 1960 Sox that mashed the ball all over the yard, but let the opposition do the same. Now this not so surprising comparison to the 05 Red Sox. One team they surely do not remind me of in the slightest is the 05 White Sox. The last sentence in Rogers column is correct. The White Sox have backed themselves into a corner and time is now very short. They may be only 1/2 game behind in the wild card, but definitely headed in the wrong direction any way you want to look at it.

soxinem1
09-05-2006, 02:02 PM
I hate to give Phil credit for anything, but all the parallels are there:

1. Weaker starting pitching

2. Weaker bullpen

3. No speed

4. Poor defense

Time to open our eyes and face reality fans. Unless this ship snaps into orbit pretty dad gum quick, it is sinking.

And that is not being a dark cloud, either.

caulfield12
09-05-2006, 02:09 PM
I hate to give Phil credit for anything, but all the parallels are there:

1. Weaker starting pitching

2. Weaker bullpen

3. No speed

4. Poor defense

Time to open our eyes and face reality fans. Unless this ship snaps into orbit pretty dad gum quick, it is sinking.

And that is not being a dark cloud, either.

I do think this year's pen is far superior to the Red Sox one, but certainly not the equivalent of last year's statistically or performance-wise. Potential, yes, but that potential has gotten us multiple losses this week due to Thornton, McCarthy and Jenks.

fquaye149
09-05-2006, 02:20 PM
But Epstein made the conscious choice to make moves that depleted the rotation.

Kenny actually tried to BOLSTER our rotation.

So they ended up similarly. What's the point?

veeter
09-05-2006, 02:25 PM
It just goes to show you how fragile the winning formula is. I soaked in every moment of last year, the post-season and the celebrating because we may never see it again. The Sox are going to be very good, for a long time. They'll contend every year. But will they have that perfect blend to win it all? I hope so, but it seems like it's going to be tough.

caulfield12
09-05-2006, 02:26 PM
But Epstein made the conscious choice to make moves that depleted the rotation.

Kenny actually tried to BOLSTER our rotation.

So they ended up similarly. What's the point?

Getting rid of Arroyo was the one that was harped on the most, but he's gone downhill and the NL is the NL, so it's hard to measure what he would or could have accomplished in Fenway. He certainly wasn't going to lead them to the playoffs.

Having David Wells and Clement under contract, they were a little bit boxed into a corner adding MORE pitchers. Remember, they had Schilling and Wakefield and Lester (among others) in the minors. And getting Beckett was probably the splashiest offseason move of any of the teams. The Red Sox added an "ace" and subtracted a five (in their minds), we got rid of a fifth (El Duque) for a younger, more high potential fifth in Vazquez.

Of course, as it turns out, they probably would have been better off with Sanchez/Ramirez/Arroyo and the reliever they sent to the Padres for Bard who's simply been excellent. The problem is that it's really difficult to gauge moves now because of the disparity between the AL and NL is so great.

caulfield12
09-05-2006, 02:33 PM
It just goes to show you how fragile the winning formula is. I soaked in every moment of last year, the post-season and the celebrating because we may never see it again. The Sox are going to be very good, for a long time. They'll contend every year. But will they have that perfect blend to win it all? I hope so, but it seems like it's going to be tough.

Don't be so certain...Minnesota and Detroit look set for the future with their blend of pitching and youth, the Indians only need two more starters and a closer and the Royals' system is filled with as many young hitters as the D-Rays.

Should we be competitive? Yes, of course, 2nd or 3rd and competitive for first every season. But we either need McCarthy or Broadway to become aces or for an injury to sideline Bonderman/Verlander/Andrew Miller or Santana/Liriano/Garza. Those two teams are well out in front of us, both with their rotations and minor league depth. We've traded away Lumsden and Gio Gonzalez, both expected to be no worse than 3rd or 4th starters and possibly #2 guys. It's dangerous to lose two lefties with that talent when we're facing a team in our own division that has the two best lefties in the game.

Or we need one of our four starters to emerge like Contreras did last season and carry the team like Garland has done.

chaerulez
09-05-2006, 03:21 PM
I found it to be a good column by Phil.

Jerko
09-05-2006, 03:25 PM
The only thing I'd like to have in common with the 2005 Red Sox is the fact that they made the playoffs.

Lip Man 1
09-05-2006, 03:45 PM
I have no issues with Phil's thoughts. I think they are correct in every way.

Lip

fquaye149
09-05-2006, 07:26 PM
Getting rid of Arroyo was the one that was harped on the most, but he's gone downhill and the NL is the NL, so it's hard to measure what he would or could have accomplished in Fenway. He certainly wasn't going to lead them to the playoffs.

Having David Wells and Clement under contract, they were a little bit boxed into a corner adding MORE pitchers. Remember, they had Schilling and Wakefield and Lester (among others) in the minors. And getting Beckett was probably the splashiest offseason move of any of the teams. The Red Sox added an "ace" and subtracted a five (in their minds), we got rid of a fifth (El Duque) for a younger, more high potential fifth in Vazquez.

Of course, as it turns out, they probably would have been better off with Sanchez/Ramirez/Arroyo and the reliever they sent to the Padres for Bard who's simply been excellent. The problem is that it's really difficult to gauge moves now because of the disparity between the AL and NL is so great.

I'm talking about the transition from '04-'05 on Epstein's part. According to the title of this thread, so was Phil.:rolleyes: